Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32740775›Full record

ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2020

Advanced Modeling Methods-Applications to Bone Fracture Mechanics.

Ani Ural

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ani UralDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Villanova University, 800 Lancaster Avenue, Villanova, PA, 19085, USA. ani.ural@villanova.edu.
Villanova University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe goal of this review is to summarize recent advances in modeling of bone fracture using fracture mechanics-based approaches at multiple length scales spanning nano- to macroscale. RECENT

findingsDespite the additional information that fracture mechanics-based models provide over strength-based ones, the application of this approach to assessing bone fracture is still somewhat limited. Macroscale fracture models of bone have demonstrated the potential of this approach in uncovering the contributions of geometry, material property variation, as well as loading mode and rate on whole bone fracture response. Cortical and cancellous microscale models of bone have advanced the understanding of individual contributions of microstructure, microarchitecture, local material properties, and material distribution on microscale fracture resistance of bone. Nano/submicroscale models have provided additional insight into the effect of specific changes in mineral, collagen, and non-collagenous proteins as well as their interaction on energy dissipation and fracture resistance at small length scales. Advanced modeling approaches based on fracture mechanics provide unique information about the underlying multiscale fracture mechanisms in bone and how these mechanisms are influenced by the structural and material constituents of bone at different length scales. Fracture mechanics-based modeling provides a powerful approach that complements experimental evaluations and advances the understanding of critical determinants of fracture risk.

Indexed as

Finite Element AnalysisModels, TheoreticalBiomechanical PhenomenaCancellous BoneCortical BoneFractures, BoneHumansModels, BiologicalBone fracture mechanicsBone fracture resistanceBone mechanicsCohesive finite element modelingExtended finite element method (XFEM)Multiscale finite element models of bone

Identifiers

PMID32740775
OpenAlexW3046369350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.